I think I get what you mean, people conform to "fit in" and what not whether its consciously or subconsciously and continue to judge others who behave in this way. Everyone has done it at least once -__-

You can call yourself moral or immoral. Good or bad. Truth is, you're neither of these. Every human is a being not conforming absolutely to any morality or immorality. You can speak of yourself acting in a given situation in a certain way, yet you might come to find yourself doing something different, which makes you rather hypocritical.

Even if you proclaim that you don't have your own preset of reactions to scenarios, you still tend to contradict this while denying it. Even doing nothing is making a decision.

I never say what i might do in a certain situation and if I have to I usually say as many possibilities that come to mind. No one is perfect so just be yourself! People are biased because they only look at things from their perspective and it is hard not too. (please don't try to say it is easy for you because that will just be biased thinking)

Depending on the degree of hypocrisy, I believe yes, we are all hypocrites. We abhor certain issues in life yet we continue to support it subconsciously. There is nothing wrong with that, though.
What's important is that you believe in yourself, and believe in something greater than yourself; To accept society as a package (see it for what it is) then integrate and voice out your point of view.

Everybody's a hypocrite, everybody's a racist, and everybody's sexist. Try and deny all you want, it's true. Just accept it and move on, the best you can do is just keep that level to a minimum, but it will always be there....lurking in the shadows.....feeding....waiting.....stalking....just like the lasagna under my bed ^_^

There is no denial here... or is there? If anything, I've observed myself feigning moral wholesomeness and having it backfire on me, which is in effect that same as being a pompous ass.

the word hypocrite has changed much since the ancient time of the Greeks..

. Psychologists have suggested that we tend to be most critical about characteristics in others that we most hate in ourselves. Perhaps it is impossible to never be a hypocrite, though the goal of having your words match your deeds is a good one to set.

You invent hypothetical situations that may or may not exist. Therefore, everyone cannot be a hypocrite because you haven't proved that anyone is a hypocrite. If you said that everyone is a hypocrite knowing your theory is without evidence, that makes you a hypocrite. However, even that last statement cannot prove that you are a hypocrite.

It does prove this; you are making a claim under the notion that your intellect is, in fact, greater than my own, in which it might be, but as it stands, likely isn't. Or are you going to post a low res picture of your smarmy Harvard Law degree to show me up?

I am not questioning your intellect, I am questioning your method. In early times, people thought that the Earth was flat. They said it, just as you did, as if it was a fact. The evidence they used was very much as yours, without any objective or experimental evidence. Of course you can try to prove your point, you will not be able to thwart rational inquiry.

You may in fact have a greater intellect than me, but that too has to be proved through objective, rational means.

the word hypocrite has changed much since the ancient time of the Greeks..

. Psychologists have suggested that we tend to be most critical about characteristics in others that we most hate in ourselves. Perhaps it is impossible to never be a hypocrite, though the goal of having your words match your deeds is a good one to set.

I think the real problem lies in our self-worth being damaged by unnecessary shaming and blaming, which further preventing us from making real intimacy with each other as well as ourselves individually.

... So very quickly -- really about six weeks into this research -- I ran into this unnamed thing that absolutely unraveled connection in a way that I didn't understand or had never seen. And so I pulled back out of the research and thought, I need to figure out what this is. And it turned out to be shame. And shame is really easily understood as the fear of disconnection. Is there something about me that, if other people know it or see it, that I won't be worthy of connection. The things I can tell you about it: it's universal; we all have it. The only people who don't experience shame have no capacity for human empathy or connection. No one wants to talk about it, and the less you talk about it the more you have it. What underpinned this shame, this "I'm not good enough," -- which we all know that feeling: "I'm not blank enough. I'm not thin enough, rich enough, beautiful enough, smart enough, promoted enough." The thing that underpinned this was excruciating vulnerability, this idea of, in order for connection to happen, we have to allow ourselves to be seen, really seen....

.... One of the things that I think we need to think about is why and how we numb. And it doesn't just have to be addiction. The other thing we do is we make everything that's uncertain certain. Religion has gone from a belief in faith and mystery to certainty. I'm right, you're wrong. Shut up. That's it. Just certain. The more afraid we are, the more vulnerable we are, the more afraid we are. This is what politics looks like today. There's no discourse anymore. There's no conversation. There's just blame. You know how blame is described in the research? A way to discharge pain and discomfort. We perfect. If there's anyone who wants their life to look like this it would be me, but it doesn't work. Because what we do is we take fat from our butts and put it in our cheeks. Which just, I hope in a hundred years, people will look back and go, "Wow."(citation)

So if and when an individual either believes or perceives, which neither has to be real, that someone else has the same unworthy characteristic as they do. They could all just be shaming and blaming each other for no good reason whatsoever, and further disconnection ensured as a result.

Self-reference via "all people are hypocrites" while being a person (or even a hypocrite for that matter) yourself doesn't make the statement illogical or invalid. In the Cretan Paradox, Epimenides referred to the Cretans as liars always, but he himself was a Cretan and therefore his statement is most likely untrue. Being a person and stating that all people are hypocrites does not carry the same logical paradox because being a person does not undo the truth of the statement.

However, saying you are neither good nor bad because you are a hypocrite is a self-referential paradox. You cannot say that all people are hypocrites and then go on to say that all people are neither good nor bad on the basis that if you say one you mean another. This will break down to the Cretan Paradox.

Stating all people are hypocrites alone? Not a problem.

Stating all people are hypocrites and then calling them liars in all states of morality? Paradoxical.

So, the Cretan Paradox applies in this context, just wanted to expand on how it should have been said.

Here's the thing - there is no set moral code for humans. Some get their moral codes from their religion, but then look at the diversity in that. Some get their moral codes from a set philosophy, but there are many philosophies in this world. Some of us get our moral codes from life experience. Who are you to judge everyone by your one set moral code?

Of course I don't think that anyone is perfect, but I'd argue that most moral codes leave a little bit of leeway for "forgive and forget" and "try to right the wrongs you've made". Everyone has done and will continue to do things that hurt other people (some regret this, others do not). That's simply a facet of human nature. You can dwell on the fact that everyone has their flaws (according to your moral code) and sink in a whirlpool of anger and despair. You can also accept the fact that everyone has flaws (according to your moral code) and move on. Are you going to get hurt by others? Without a doubt. Are you going to see things that are unfair and make you angry? Absolutely. Life's not fair and people are not perfect.

Here's the thing - there is no set moral code for humans. Some get their moral codes from their religion, but then look at the diversity in that. Some get their moral codes from a set philosophy, but there are many philosophies in this world. Some of us get our moral codes from life experience. Who are you to judge everyone by your one set moral code?

Of course I don't think that anyone is perfect, but I'd argue that most moral codes leave a little bit of leeway for "forgive and forget" and "try to right the wrongs you've made". Everyone has done and will continue to do things that hurt other people (some regret this, others do not). That's simply a facet of human nature. You can dwell on the fact that everyone has their flaws (according to your moral code) and sink in a whirlpool of anger and despair. You can also accept the fact that everyone has flaws (according to your moral code) and move on. Are you going to get hurt by others? Without a doubt. Are you going to see things that are unfair and make you angry? Absolutely. Life's not fair and people are not perfect.

This is only true if you are sophomoric and immature. The true morality is the realization that we are all rejects due to being human, and we will forever descend into a spiral of degeneration.